Commentary on Judgment Cass. civ., Section VI - 3, Ord. no. 29760 of 2022: Medical Liability and Statute of Limitations

The recent order of the Supreme Court of Cassation, no. 29760 of October 12, 2022, offers interesting points for reflection on medical liability and the statute of limitations for damages. In this case, the appellant, A.A., had suffered a road accident that led him to undergo surgical procedures, during which, according to him, a neurological injury was caused by the healthcare professionals. The Court had to decide whether the right to compensation had already expired, considering the moment when the appellant should have perceived the damage.

The Legal Context of the Judgment

The Court of Imperia had rejected the claim for compensation due to the expiration of the statute of limitations, establishing that the appellant should have perceived, with ordinary diligence, the injury suffered already at the time of the second surgery. The Court of Appeal of Genoa confirmed this decision, arguing that the statute of limitations begins to run from the moment the damage can be perceived and assessed by the patient, as established by articles 2935 and 2947 of the Civil Code.

The Court affirmed that the reconstruction of facts is reserved for the judge of merit, whose task is to evaluate the evidence and decide based on the elements presented in court.

The Reasoning of the Court of Cassation

The Court of Cassation declared the grounds of appeal filed by A.A. inadmissible, holding that the criticisms formulated did not highlight a violation of legal norms, but rather an alternative interpretation of the facts. In particular, the appellant argued that the judge had failed to consider relevant medical documentation, but the Court reiterated that the assessment of merit belongs to the first and second-instance judges.

• The right to compensation begins to run from the moment the damage is perceived or could be perceived.
• The patient must exercise normal diligence to understand their health condition.
• The evaluation of evidence is reserved for the judge of merit and is not subject to review by the court of last resort.

Conclusions

This judgment represents an important confirmation of the principles relating to medical liability and the statute of limitations for compensation rights. It emphasizes how crucial it is for the patient to be attentive and responsive to their health conditions, as the law protects the right to compensation only if the damage has been perceived in a timely manner. The Court of Cassation, therefore, reiterates the need for active vigilance on the part of the patient, urging them not to neglect signs of malaise that could give rise to the right to compensation.